Where did God come from originally? Its existence?
- Thread starter Vance
- Start date
- Status
Steve
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2004
- Messages
- 192
- Reaction score
- 0
The answers to what's out there is in here!
42
The Hitchhicker's Guide to the Galaxy
Don't Panic
Steve
42
The Hitchhicker's Guide to the Galaxy
Don't Panic
Steve
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2004
- Messages
- 54,903
- Reaction score
- 1,518
"Humans just lucked out"? I don't believe in "luck". I think it requires more faith to depend on "luck" than to depend on God. I believe that God planned for certain animals to have "usable parts" for humans. It wasn't an accident or luck.deaflibrarian said:
M
Momoftwo
Guest
Hi,
Ok.....where is the heaven? Is Heaven right here as where we are here right now? Or is Heaven in the sky?
Momoftwo
Ok.....where is the heaven? Is Heaven right here as where we are here right now? Or is Heaven in the sky?
Momoftwo
Rose Immortal
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2005
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reaction score
- 0
I think that Heaven is a higher dimension of existence. The two do interact, I think, but I can't say where it is in terms of physical locations in this universe, because I'm not sure you can correspond locations in a higher realm to those in ours.
Reba said:
Some sciences are more observational than experimental like astronomy. The stuff that is observed is explained by applying other stuff from experimental sciences like physics and chemistry. Maybe we could do the same with gods. If anyone can observate gods, we could try explaining how god stuff works. If the gods are beyond measure, then how could we explain it? Also, if the gods can't be detected through physical means, which is how measuring devices work, then how come people claim that they felt god? People are made of physical stuff like atoms.
They could claim that they're feeling gods though their soul or spirit, but that's just more of the same, unmeasureable stuff. If there was a link between the soul and the person's mind, we'd should be able to see some sort of link between the soul and the physical material in the head. I haven't seen that because nobody showed me evidence for that yet. If we see people's behaviors impacted by religion and they claim that it was a god acting on their souls as a bridge to impact the physical world so we could see the behaviors, we should see evidence for that bridge.
If there is no evidence for something, it is meaningless to use it in scientific theories unless someone comes up the evidence for it by observating it or come with a hypothesis about it and doing an experiment that gives evidence.
DreamSlayer said:
Who said that a god had to be the first domino? We could use Occam's razor to remove that and have the first domino being the existence of the universe or whatever realm the universe may be in that they are now working on in hypotheses.
For sponteneous life to happen, only one 6 would be enough. Rolling the die many times would have the amount of 6's approach 1/6 of the number of rolls. If there are many many rolls, there could still be many 6's.
Opportunity seems to be large because of the vastness of space, giving enough rooms for many stars and planets.
I'd say that some of the chances of those things happening somewhere on Earth wasn't too small because Earth is big place with plenty of room for many molecules. If there was a n chance of something happening, there would be about n/m instances of it happening where m is the number of all of the events considered. If m is very large, as allowed by Earth having lots of room for many such events, n, the number of of the events that helped to lead to life, would still be large.
Many of those events from the squence happens many times, so the above applies too. The universe is big enough for many planets. The Earth is big enough for many molecules and living things. So enough things, m, happen, for each consideration in the squence, from planets to living things, for n, the number of "successes" to be large. It's like tossing a die a million times. About 160 to 170 thousand of them should be 6's.
If physics was different, maybe our type of life might not exist, but the different physics could allow for other types of life. Here is a page on other possible biochemistries that might be possible in our universe. The ones that look interesting to me are the P-N and ammonia-water chemistries. If physics was tweaked to allow P and N to be created by stars in suitable ratios, maybe it could be more workable. In our Universe, ammonia-water based life could be possible on Titan in the Saturn system.
I'll add a quote from here.
What this means is that the environment, chemistry and physics restrict what different things are possible. The randomness is within that set, not scary and bad chaos with no restrictions.
The sickle cell anemia mutation does have some benefits. Here, it says:
Beneficial mutations would include mutations that happen to undo harmful mutations. Some mutations are also neutral. Multiple codons are used for the same amino acids, like AAA and AAG both coding for lysine. Changing AAA into AAG won't matter.
One beneficial mutation would be the insertion of the genetic information used to splice genes for use in B and T cells in the immune system to make antibodies.
Another one would be the mutation that copied and changed the gene for either the red or green cones' photopigment into the other one on the X chromosome, giving us 3 types of cones, instead of 2 like dogs have.
Reba said:
It takes faith to believe in a god. It doesn't take faith to have no belief and to consider processes by which life would arise in the universe. We already know the universe is there. Not everybody says the same about gods. It is not necessary to consider "luck" to be a magic thing out there to consider what processes can operate in this universe that could result in life.
Beowulf said:RedFox said:Some sciences are more observational than experimental like astronomy... If we see people's behaviors impacted by religion...
Evolution, huh?
Yeah, we see the leftovers from the past, like the fossils. It's like studying isotope ratios of elements in material from space to figure out what the early solar system was like. The guide is the physics and chemistry we already know from experiments in our labs.
What experiments could we do for biology? We could think of people as selectors for what dogs and horses to breed and see what resulted. That would be a model with us acting as the selector to make things operate faster than selection by just the environoment, so we could get results faster.
We could also notice things like that bacteria species that depends on a manmade material for food. Then we can see how that makes sense because bacterica have shorter reproduction cycles, so they'd evolute faster. A guide for evolution research would be things that reproduce fast enough to have plenty of generations within the lifetimes of the researchers. These things, like bacteria, have the same basic things like DNA. So we can apply basic ideas we learn from them to things with longer reproduction cycles.
It is also encouraging that results from different fields like geology, paleontology and genetics all work together to support the theory.
HeartGirl
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2005
- Messages
- 150
- Reaction score
- 1
CyberRed said:
but maggots will eat our flesh too. Cycle of life...
Maggots will turn into flies, birds will eat flies,
cats will eat birds, cats will die, their flesh will
be like fertilizer for grass, cows will eat grass,
then we humans will eat beef.
So I am wondering who the person's flesh I have eaten?
- Status